Munch-Are you contending that players, all else being equal, AREN"T trying to maximize their income? It doesn’t take research to know that, all it takes is a brain and the ability to count.
etv78 - are you contending that maximum salary is the ONLY thing players worry about? It doesn’t take any actual research to know that either, since there are plenty of players that don’t wait until free agency to maximize their contracts. The fact that Reyes hasn’t taken on Scott Boras as his agent speaks to that pretty plainly. Look at players who take paycuts. LeBron James took a paycut to play for the Heat. A-Rod was looking to take a paycut in 2004 so he could play for the Red Sox, but the MLBPA vetoed the trade, and the Yankees picked him up.
I’ll point out that it takes just one example to refute an absolute statement. If you’d like to amend what you said, please feel free.
They did have the option of waiting until free agency though - which is my point. As you say - it’s a matter of risk aversion. The moment someone does something logical like factor in the possibility of becoming injured, they’ve stopped maximizing their income, and switched to mitigating their risk.
Boras gets a bad rap, yes he is an s.o.b. negotiator, but that is the job of an agent, to get the best deal possible. But when you look at the story of Kendry(s) Morales who last year changed agents from one who stole alot of money from him to Scott Boras (and from what I have read Kendry(s) got counseled by the Angels who to go with for a new agent). Hey at least Boras is treating his client’s money correctly.
Agreed! Boras may be a jerk, but he’s an ethical jerk.
Munch-you picked 2 examples out of 750 baseball players and 360 basketball players! I’m not limiting my observation to Boras clients, but athletes in general.
First off, I’m up to 4 examples (Butler, Longoria, James, A-Rod). Secondly, what’s your point? When you use absolute language, all it takes is ONE example to prove your point incorrect, and there are countless other examples of players who sign contracts before entering free agency.
The fact is, players RARELY maximize their salary. Cliff Lee turned down an $30 million so he could return to Philly. The aforementioned Butler and Longoria took a deal before hitting free agency - and that was just off the top of my head. Do I really need to go on? You’re already wrong - do you need to be MORE wrong?
Not necessarily: it’s entirely possible for a player to mitigate his risk in this fashion while simultaneously increasing his expected return. Yes, most of the time he’ll wind up with somewhat less salary, but those times that hedging does pay off can swamp the calculation, because instead of representing the difference between $14M and $12M, it represents the difference between $12M and nothing. Through hedging, the player might thus increase the expected value of his earnings, it which case it’s pretty meaningless that he *might *have gotten more money by accepting risk.
But even when that isn’t the case – i.e., even when the player reduces his expectation through hedging like this – risk amelioration is still a benefit in and of itself, and should be seen as part of his compensation. The player agrees to a deal whereby he will be paid tens of millions of dollars AND the burden of his injury/decline risk is shifted from himself to the team. It’s not that he isn’t maximizing his compensation, but rather that he’s accepting part of it in a form other than salary.
Of course, there are a lot of players who will accept a somewhat smaller deal (even after factoring in the value of risk reduction) in order to wind up with a more agreeable franchise. On the other hand, there are a lot of players who won’t, and most of the ones who do are only willing to play around like this on the margins of their salary.
You mean like the rest of humanity?
While I’m willing to acknowledge that most players contract are reasonable even if they sign early for less than market value, the Longoria contract had to be just about the friendliest contract for ownership since the advent of free agency.
Varlosz, there’s nothing in there that really contradicts what I’ve been saying - I’m merely stating that the number of players who will take a Cliff Lee or Evan Longoria pro-team contract is greater than zero. It seems that etv78 is the new gonzomax in baseball threads - absolute statements with nothing to back them up, and a complete unwillingness to back down once shown the crack in the dam.
Hawkeyeop-I have ZERO problem with “regular” people doing this, because they don’t make MILLIONS playing a game!
Oh god, has it now devolved into “I don’t have to make a coherent argument, because anything over the MLB minimum $400k is the MAXIMUM”? I want gonzomax back…
Moderator Note
The purpose of the thread is to discuss Scott Boras, athlete representation and related topics. Is it not to discuss the alleged faults of SDMB posters. Some posts are bordering on personal insults. Please do not go in that direction.
Thanks,
RickJay
Moderator
Is he a jerk?
Only in the sense that he cares more about making $ than the fans.
Why is that being a jerk?
The nerve of the man to do his job.
All I mean is that his clients make more $ (playing a GAME) than the average person will see in several lifetimes.
Welcome to capitalism.
Guess you don’t understand middle-class resentment. :rolleyes:
So what do you propose Boras to do? Quit it all, and stand on the corner preaching the sins of capitalism?